Firstly,
I do believe that there are many religions in the world today and even though I
believe, as a Christian, that Christ Jesus is the only way to salvation, I
still cannot say that a religion is better than another because that is left
for the Almighty God to decide.

These books listed above carry
numerous claims against the entirety of Christianity and in order to debunk
Christianity, these Authors contradict themselves or what they believe in,
misquote sources and add words to a misunderstood aspect of Christianity so
that the reader develops a very strong hatred for Christianity and if possible,
the followers of the doctrine.

I will first and foremost, be
addressing the book “Israel and the prophecies of the Holy Qur’an” by Ali Akbar.
I felt so disappointed after reading this book that in fact, I felt that the
name he gave the book was a mistake; he, instead, should have named the book:
“Debunking Christianity” if not, what does the name “Israel and the prophecies
of the Holy Qur’an” have to do with debunking Christianity? Why those attacks
on Christianity? If a Christian says anything against Islam, they [Muslims]
immediately give the person a name- “Islamophobic bigot”- not minding the fact
that they do the same criticism to others. This man [Ali Akbar] focused solely
on trying to debunk Christianity and in most instances, he, misunderstanding
what he was trying to refute, condemns a particular belief [Trinity] as
polytheism even though in actual sense, it is strict monotheism.

Saturday, 23 March 2013

NOTE: many
of the Trinitarian objections made by the JWs are typical of virtually every
anti-Trinitarian group. This section does however focus on the Watchtower's
booklet Should you Believe in the Trinity. For more
exegetical responses to other anti-Trinitarian objections and assertions see:
Oneness
Objections to the Doctrine of the Trinity.

The Watchtower
Bible and Tract Society (i.e., the corporate name of the Jehovah's
Witnesses; hereafter JWs) prints enormous amounts of books, pamphlets, and
literature teaching their members that the doctrine of the Trinity is a false
doctrine. The JWs are taught that the Trinity doctrine originated from the
Devil, and promulgated by the Catholic Church. To be sure, JWs have a gross
misunderstanding of the doctrine, hence, since the early twentieth century the
Watchtower has consistently taught that the Trinity is a false:

How
strange that any should attempt to misuse and pervert these our Lord's
words, to make them support the unreasonable and unscriptural doctrine of a
Trinity--three Gods in one person (Studies in the Scriptures, 5:76).

Never was
there a more deceptive doctrine advance than that to of the Trinity. It
could have originated only in one mind, and that the mind of Satan the Devil
(Reconciliation, 101).

Most JWs
carry around with them their most popular handout booklet (and study guide)
called: Should you Believe in the Trinity (hereafter SYBT).
If you have ever discussed the Trinity with them, you probably have been given
this booklet. The booklet provides the bulk of most arguments that they use
against the "deceived Trinitarians" thus many dedicated JWs memorize
the arguments stated in the SYBT.

Thirty-one pages of arguments against the "dreaded" doctrine of the
Trinity. Chalk-full of misquotes and selective
citations from various Encyclopedias, Dictionaries and biblical
scholars. Additionally, the SYBT contains a mega-dose of blatant
misrepresentations of early church Fathers, historic revisionism and doctrinal
deviations. But yet to the JWs, the SYBT booklet is their gun-of-choice study
guide to annihilate the "evil" Trinitarians. You might ask, why
would they take this booklet seriously when it contains so much
disinformation? The reason being: JWs do not practice independent researchoutside the libraries of their Kingdom Halls (the place where
the JWs assemble). At the end of the SYBT booklet, it concludes by saying:

There can
be no compromise with God's truths. Hence, to worship God on his terms means
to reject the Trinity doctrine. It contradicts what the prophets, Jesus the
apostles, and the early Christians believed and taught. It contradicts what
God says about himself in his own inspired Word (31; under the title
"Reject the Trinity").

JEHOVAH'S WITNESSES: OBJECTIONS TO THE TRINITY

(Based on the Watchtower publication: SYBT
and other standard arguments used by JWs)

To
assume: what is not stated must not be true is an argument from
silence. Further, to say that the doctrine of the Trinity is not true
because the exact word "Trinity" is absent from the Bible is self-refuting.
For if that kind of reasoning were true, it would then follow, that Watchtower
doctrine could not be true, for in the original Hebrew and Greek text
Watchtower terms like, “theocracy,” (which they claim their under),
"Jehovah," (Note:
"Jehovah" is an Eng. transliteration. Orig. Heb. had no vowels
only consonants: YHWH) are not contained in Scripture either. It also
does not follow that because a particular word is not contained in Scripture
that we cannot use that word to communicate a truth of God.

What
is not at all considered is that even terms like, "Bible," (a Lat.
term) or "self-existent," are not mentioned in Scripture and both
are biblical truths, which all JWs agree upon. If we were only
limited to strict biblical words, then, we would have to, when teaching
out of the New Testament, use only Koine Greek words that the New Testament
authors utilized! Employing unbiblical words does not violate the rules of sola-Scriptura,
which says Scripture alone is the sole infallible regula fidei
("rule of faith") for the church, as long as the unbiblical words
are wholly consistent with Scripture. Holding firm to the regula fidei
the early church would use unbiblical words to explain and define the biblical
data revealed within the pages of the Holy Writ.

In
other words, “Trinity” is merely a precise doctrinal word that defines the
biblical revelation that is so overwhelmingly found in Scripture: God the
Father sent God the Son; the Eternal Word, in which He became flesh (cf. John
1:1; 6:37-40; 17:5). After which God the Son died in the place of the believer
whereby His death provides full atonement for the sins of His people (cf.
Matt. 1:21; Rom. 8:32), and God the Father and God the Son sent the God the
Holy Spirit to empower the church, and dwell with believers:

“When
the Helper comes, whom I will send to you from the Father,
that is, the Spirit of truth who proceedsfrom the Father,He
will testify about Me” (John 15:26; emphasis added).

Again,
this point must be understood: We cannot confuse biblical data with doctrinal
words that merely define that data. The doctrine of the “Trinity” was
derived from the Scriptural data. Biblical scholar Benjamin B. Warfield
explains the difference:

Precisely
what the New Testament is, is the documentation of the religion of the
incarnate Son and the outpoured Spirit, that is to say, of the religion of
the Trinity, and what we mean by the doctrine of the Trinity is nothing but
the formulation in exact language of the conception of God presupposed in
the religion of the incarnate Son and out poured Spirit. (Benjamin B.
Warfield, Biblical Doctrines (Carlisle: The Banner of Truth Trust,
1929, 146.)

Thus the Tri-Unity of God is based on biblical data. The
formulation of doctrinal words, however, came later when Christians,
developed the precise term "Trinity" that simply defined the
biblical data, because of the heresies that denied the biblical data in
some way or other. As with the doctrinal terms like "Substitutionary
Atonement," "Incarnation" or even the term "Gospel."
All these terms came later after the apostolic age, which the church used to
define the revelation or data that is clearly contained in Scripture.

Moreover, salvation is completely dependent on the Tri-Unity of God
(i.e., soteriological
Trinity). Example: The Covenant of Redemption, that is, all
that the Father gives to Christ will come and He will raise them up at the
last day (cf. John. 6:37ff). That Jesus is the Mediator between God (the
Father) and man (cf. 1 Tim. 2:5) can only be true if Jesus is God and is a distinct
Person from the one He is mediating for. Again, this point must be
understood: we cannot confuse the Scriptural data of the Trinity
with the doctrinal word, "Trinity" that defines the biblical data.

OBJECTION #2: PAGAN ORIGINS

The book also asserts, as do most
anti-Trinitarians, that the doctrine of the Trinity is derived from pagan
sources.

RESPONSE:This
is a fallacy of false cause (misrepresents the cause). The
Trinity is an utterly unique Christian doctrine. Pagans worshipped and
believed in many gods (as with the Mormons) hence, the
references in SYBT to the so-called parallelisms of the pagans were to
THREE separate gods NOT one God in existing in three distinct
Persons.

OBJECTION # 3: CHURCH FATHERS

The SYBT booklet asserts that the early (Anti-Nicene;
before the Council of Nicene; A.D. 325) church Fathers did NOT
believe in the doctrine of the Trinity.
The JWs booklet quotes from the Anti-Nicene church Fathers: Justin
Martyr (c. A.D.
160); Irenaeus (c. A.D.
180); Clement of Alexandria (c.
A.D. 195); Hippolytus
(c. A.D.
205); Tertullian (c. A.D. 213); and Origen (c.
A.D. 225). However when we refer
to actual statements contained in many works (e.g., The Anti-Nicene
Fathers, found at most city libraries and seminaries) clear is the fact:
the SYBT booklet grossly misquotes or misrepresents what they said and
believe. Not surprising is that the SYBT does not provide the addresses of
the citations; for obvious reasons.

RESPONSE:This
an argument from ignorance. They all, unequivocally, believed
in the full Deity of Christ (the quotes below are from the Ante-Nicene Fathers [hereafter ANF], (ed.
Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson; 1885-1887; reprint, 10 vols. Peabody,
MA: Hendrickson, 1994).

Ignatius bishop of Antioch (c.
A.D. 105). The SYBT does not
quote him, however, Ignatius was an early church Father that was a disciple of
the Apostle John.

God
Himself was manifested in human form for the renewal of eternal life (1:58).

Continue
in intimate union with Jesus Christ, our God (1:68).

I pray
for your happiness forever in our God, Jesus Christ (1:96).

Justin Martyr(A.D.
150). The SYBT booklet says that Justin called Jesus "a created
angel" (p. 7). Justin did call Christ an angel, however only in the sense
that He came as a messenger, to the people of the Old Testament
(e.g., the angel of the LORD who spoke to Moses and claimed to be the "I
AM"; cf. Exod. 3:14ff; see ANF, 1. 223). The English word
"angel" has the denotative meaning, in both Hebrew and Greek, as
simply "messenger."
Jesus certainly was active in the Old Testament as a "messenger,"
and that is what Justin meant. John 1:18 says: "No man has ever seen God
at any time; the only begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has
explained Him." Jesus in the Old Testament interacted with the people of
God (e.g., angel of the LORD; the Rock that accompanied the Israelites, see 1
Cor. 10:4).

Never
once did Justin say or infer that Christ was createdonly
the converse is asserted: Jesus Christ was the Eternal God. But again the
quotes in the SYBT booklet are without addresses. Let us read what
Justin really said:

He
deserves to be worshipped as God and as Christ (1:229).

For
Christ is King, Priest, God, Lord, Angel and man (1:221).

The
Father of the universe has a Son. And He, being the first-begotten Word of
God, is even God (1:184).

David
predicted that He would be born from the womb before the sun and moon,
according to the Father's will, He made Him known, being Christ, as God,
strong and to be worshipped (1:237).

Next, the
SYBT cites Irenaeus bishop of Lyons (c.
A.D. 185), as saying that Jesus
was inferior and not equal with the Father. However Irenaeus clearly believed
and defined the full Deity of Christ:

I have
shown from the Scriptures that none of the sons of Adam are, absolutely and
as to everything, called God, or named Lord, But Jesus is Himself in His own
right, beyond all men who ever lived, God, Lord, King Eternal, and the
Incarnate Word… (1:449).

Thus He
indicates in clear terms that He is God, and that His advent was in
Bethlehem… God, then, was made man, and the Lord Himself save us (1:451).

He is God
for the name Emmanuel indicates this (1:452).

Christ
Himself, therefore, together with the Father, is the God of the living, who
spoke to Moses, and who was also manifested to the fathers (1:467).

He was
man, and He was God. This was so that since as man He suffered for us, so as
God He might have compassion on us (1:545).

Clement
of Alexandria (c. A.D. 195)who is cited as saying that Jesus, was not equal to the Father.
But read what he actually said:

He is God
in the form of man. . . the Word who is God, who is in the Father, who is at
the Father's right hand. And with the form of God, He is God (2:210).

The Word
itself, that is, the Son of God, is one wit the Father by equality of
substance. He is eternal and uncreated (2:574).

Hippolytus
(c. A.D. 203)is
cited as believing that prehuman Jesus was created. But notice what this great
Christian apologist really stood for and believed:

Having
been made man, He is still God for ever. For to this effect, John also had
said, 'Who is and who was, and who is to come--the Almighty.' And he has
appropriately called Christ the 'Almighty' (5:225)

They
killed the Son of their Benefactor, for He is co-eternal with the Father
(5:220)

For, as
the Only-Begotten Word of God, being God of God, He emptied Himself,
according to the Scriptures… (5:167)

The Logos
alone of this One is from God Himself. For that reason also, He is God.
Being of the substance of God. In contrast, the world was made from nothing.
Therefore, it is not God (5:151).

Therefore,
a man . . . is compelled to acknowledge God the Father Almighty, and Christ
Jesus the Son of God--who, being God, became man, to whom also the Father
made all things subject (Himself excepted)--and the Holy Spirit; and that
these are three [Persons] (5:226).

"Go
and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the
Son, and of the Holy Spirit." By this, He showed that whoever omits any
one of these three, fails in glorifying God perfectly. For it is through
this Trinity that the Father is glorified. For the Father willed, the Son
did, and the Spirit manifested (5:228).

Tertullian
Carthage
(c. A.D. 213) is
cited next as saying, "there was a time that the Son was not" ( 7).
However, what Tertullian meant (in his argument against
the Modalism of Praxeas)
was that he believed the Word was the Eternal God but yet distinct
in His Person from God the Father, and that the Word took on the title "Son"
which was a common belief among many church Fathers (esp. the apologists).
That Tertullian said that Jesus was created or came to be (in
terms of His existence as a Person) is completely and diabolically distorting
what Tertullian meant. In fact, it was Tertullian that first
coined the word "Trinity"(Lat.
trinitas, the cognate of Gk. triados) in the West. Odd that
the SYBT booklet would even cite this church Father. Tertullian taught:

For the
very church itself--properly and principally--the Spirit Himself, in whom is
the Trinity [trinitas],
of the One Divinity: Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" (4:99;
emphasis added; cf. Against Praxeas).

This
opens the ears of Christ our God (3:715; cf. ibid.).

Surely I
might venture to claim the very Word also as being of the Creator's [Father]
substance (3:356; cf. ibid.).

Now, if
He too is God, for according to John, 'The Word was God,' then you have two
Beings-- One who commands that the thing to be made, and the other who
creates. In what sense, however, you ought to understand Him to be another.
I have already explained: on the ground of personality, not of substance.
And in the way of distinction, not of division. I must everywhere hold only
one substance, in three coherent and inseparable [persons] (3. 607; cf.
ibid.).

It should be noted
as well that in the East, as early as A.D.180, church apologist Theophilus bishop of Antioch first uses the term
“Trinity” to describe God:

In
like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types
of the Trinity [triados] of God, and His Word, and His wisdom
(Theophilus
To Autolycus 2.15, in ANF, vol. 3).

Origen
(c. A.D. 228) was also cited by SYBT as
denying that Jesus was God. However, Origen contradicts these Watchtower
assertions:

The Word
that was in the beginning with God (who is also very God) may come to us
(4:449).

The Son
is not different from the Father in substance (9:336).

Saving
baptism was not complete except by the authority of the most excellent
Trinity of them all. That is, it is made complete by naming the Father, Son,
and Holy Spirit. In this, we join the name of the Holy Spirit to the
Unbegotten God (the Father) and to His Only-Begotten Son (4:252).

The above is a mere set of examples of the massive collection of the libraries of quotations and apologetic works of
church Fathers teaching and defending the deity of Christ and the
doctrine of the Trinity are massive. To the church Fathers, teaching, and defending the
Deity of Christ and the Trinity was extremely important to them. Many of them
spilled their own blood defending these doctrines. Why? Because in Trinity
is how God revealed Himself to man: FATHER, SON, and HOLY SPIRIT.

The SYBT ends this page entitled: "What the Ante-Nicene Fathers
Taught" by this:

"Thus,
the testimony of the Bible and of history makes clear that the Trinity was
unknown throughout Biblical times and for several centuries thereafter"
(p. 7).

Unknown?

OBJECTION
#4: The
Trinity doctrine did not emerge
until fourth century:

RESPONSE:
To be sure, this is an argument from ignorance. First of all, it is
completely misleading to say that the doctrine of the Trinity did not emerge
until the fourth century. As seen above, in the East, as early as
A.D.
180, church apologist Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, first uses the term
“Trinity” to describe God:

In
like manner also the three days which were before the luminaries, are types of
the Trinity [triados] of God, and His Word, and His wisdom
(Theophilus, To Autolycus, 2.15).

And,
noted above, in the West, around
A.D.
213, the brilliant church theologian and polemicist, Tertullian of Carthage,
uses the term “Trinity”:

As
if in this way also one were not All, in that All are of One, by unity (that
is) of substance; while the mystery of the dispensation is still guarded,
which distributes the Unity into a Trinity [trinitas]
placing in their order the three Persons. . . . (Tertullian, Against
Praxeas, 2, in ANF, vol. 3).

Again,
it is true the exact English word “Trinity” is not in the Bible. But, as
we have seen, this is a meaningless objection since there are many words that
are justifiably used to communicate the truth of God, not specifically
utilized in the Hebrew or Greek text (e.g., “incarnation,”
“self-existent,” “omnipresence”; etc.). The point being that the
Christian church has used many extra-biblical terminology words to convey
divine revelation. Sola Scriptura is not simply adhering to the words of
Scripture, but it is also being faithful to the teaching of Scripture.
Regrettably, far too many people are deceived into thinking that the latter
must be rejected if it does not incorporate verbatim the language of
the former.

Descriptive
theological words do not necessarily have to be the exact words
form the original languages to communicate a biblical truth. The reason that
the Protestant church rejected (and rejects) the dogmas of Roman Catholicism
is that Rome holds to the position that the Word of God is contained in both
“tradition and Scripture.” Hence, Catholic doctrines like Purgatory,praying for the dead, the Immaculate Conception of Mary, ex
cathedra, (i.e., the infallibility of the Pope), etc., are not doctrines
derived from Scripture (the written Word), but rather church tradition.10
For these teachings are foreign to Scripture. Thus, the Protestant church
repudiates that claim whereby holding to Scripture alone11
as the sole infallible rule of faith for the church—Scripture is sufficient.
“Do not,” Paul says, “go beyond what is written” (1 Cor. 4:6 NIV).

We
are dealing, therefore, with the biblical data for the Trinity. Again,
the precise terms to which define the data (viz. formularized doctrine) came
later. So the assertion that the Trinity did not emerge until the fourth
century confuses the doctrinal word “Trinity” with the biblical data of
God: the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, which, as we will enjoy
shortly, the early church envisaged. They did not see God as a single
undifferentiated Being, but the God who revealed Himself as tri-personal.

OBJECTION #5: THE CHURCH FELL INTO TOTAL APOSTASY

JWs assert that the Early Christian church
fell into Complete Apostasy after the death of the Apostles.

RESPONSE:This
is an argument from ignorance. When did so-called apostasy
happen? What year? In point of fact, there is not a shred of anything that
would indicate or even infer that the entire Christian church
fell into apostasy. The verses that they use say that only "some"
will fall away or that "many" will abandon the faith but never
once does Scripture say that ALL will apostatize.
To assert this notion is an "easy-out" for JWs that say that: The
original Christian Church did not teach Jesus was God. Both Mormons and JWs
maintain this idea of a total apostasy only to avoid the truth
that the early Christians taught what Christians believe today: THERE EXIST
ONE TRUE GOD and JESUS IS THE ETERNAL GOD DISTINCT FROM HIS FATHER.

If the early Christian church apostatized, why do we read in Revelation 2:1ff.
that the Ephesus church was commended by God for not tolerating wicked men and
testing those who claimed to be apostles but were false. And we read of six
other functioning Christian churches. The point is this: the Apostle John
wrote Revelation, in or around A.D.
70-90!--no more than forty or sixty years after
the resurrection Christ!

So, did the entire Christian church fall after that? How could this happen?
What does that say about the condition of the early Christians? Where they so
spiritually bankrupt that they suddenly fell to paganism? Or suddenly just
quit believing? What does that say about God? Could He not hold His own church
together? Where is the evidence for this?

That
the whole Christian church is even able to fall-away is notion that is sharply
refuted by the apostles and Jesus Christ Himself:

Thou art
the Christ, the Son of the living God. . . . And Jesus answered and
said unto him. . . . "That
thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the gates of
hell shall not prevail against it" (Matt. 16:16-18; KJV).

"All
authority in heaven and earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make
disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of
the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have
commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the
age" (Matt. 28:18-20; emphasis added).

Jesus promised that He would never leave
His church, nor would the gates of hell come against her. Likewise, the
apostle Paul explains: "To him
[Jesus] be the glory in the church and in Christ Jesus throughout all
generations, for ever and ever! Amen (Eph. 3:21). In contrast
to the assertions made by the JWs, that His teachings were somehow lost, Jesus
made a clear promise that His teachings would indeed last: "You
did not choose me, but I choose you and appointed you to go and bear
fruit -- fruit that will last" (John 15:16; emphasis
added). As seen
above, the church Fathers from Ignatius, to the great defender of the Trinity,
Athanasius, and after, believed and taught that: Jesus Christ was the eternal
God Creator of all things.

Think about it, if there were no true Christians until the JWs emerged (1870),
then, would it not follow that we would find distinctive Watchtower
theology somewhere in church history? We have records of virtually every
teaching that was prorogated from the first century. Where in church
history though were the teachings of the JWs? And of course the
Mormons (who make the same church fell in total apostasy claim) have
the same problem: where was distinctive LDS doctrine before Joseph Smith
(1830)?

Historically, we do have records of virtually every promulgated theology. However
we do not have ANY historical record of distinctive Watchtower theology.
Hence, are we to believe that for over 1800 years Jehovah did not have a
witness until Charles Taze Russell (JW's founder) came on the scene? The only
teaching that even resembles Watchtower theology (esp. Jesus as a
created being) was Arianism.1Accordingly, the Christian church roundly and
sharply condemned Arianism because it denied Jesus Christ as eternal God, as
the JWs teach.

OBJECTION
#6: THE TRINITY IS THREE GODS

Most JWs grossly misrepresent the doctrine of the
Trinity by asserting that the Trinity is three separate Gods.

RESPONSE:Again, this a typical straw man argument. The doctrine
of the Trinity is not three Gods. The doctrine of three Gods is tritheism,
not Trinitarianism. Three Gods is how Mormons
view the Godhead. The foundation of the Trinity is pure ontological
monotheism: ONE GOD. One Being revealed in three distinct
Persons, coexistent, coequal, and coeternal.

OBJECTION #7: THE TRINITY IS ILLOGICAL

The SYBT says that the Trinity is, "Beyond
the grasp of human reason" (4). And that God is, "Not a God of
confusion" (ibid.). From that line of thought, JWs will argue that
Trinity cannot be true, it too confusing.

RESPONSE:For something to be illogical, it would have to contradict
reason. The doctrine of the Trinity does not contradict reason.
The Trinity is not 1 person in 3 persons or 1 God in 3 Gods. It does not
follow that because something is not completely explicable that it cannot
exist or cannot be true. For example, many of the formulations in physical
science, not contrary to reason, and may be apprehended (though it may not be
comprehended) by the human mind.2
Does anyone completely understand how light travels? Does it travel as a wave,
corpuscular or quantum phenomenon? Yet, we believe in the reality of light,
even though we cannot totally comprehend it.

The Trinity may not be totally comprehendible, but we can surely apprehend
how God has revealed Himself to us through Scripture: There is ONE TRUE
GOD; the Father is God the Son is God and the Holy Spirit is God. And the
three are clearly differentiated. One God revealed in three distinct Persons.
We cannot simply put God in easy-to-understand categories to gratify our
feeble minds. We are called to worship God how He revealed Himself to us in
His Word, anything less, is not worshipping, or honoring the true God.

The JWs reject the Trinity and hence they reject God. God is tri-personal He
is not a unipersonal God as taught by the JWs. They are without excuse:

"Do
you not know? Have you not heard? The LORD is the everlasting God, the
Creator of the ends of the earth." (Isa. 40:28).

Notes

1, Early in the
fourth century, Arius of Alexandria, postulated his teaching that Jesus was a different
substance (heteroousios) than that of the Father. He used some of the
same argumentation that the JWs use today. And of course, Arianism was
completely refuted as heresy at the Council of Nicea (A.D.
325).

2,
Example taken from: Robert M. Bowman, Jr., Why You Should Believe in the
Trinity, An Answer to Jehovah's Witnesses (Baker House Books, Grand Rapids
Michigan), 17.

Refuting the Watchtower

Comments and Responses Welcome

If you would like to offer supplemental comments or a rebuttal to the analysis presented here, feel free to drop me a note. Be aware that by sending an email response, you are giving implied consent for me to publish it on this site if I so choose.
All email will be read and considered. The inclusion or exclusion of
any email is at my discretion. I will make one promise to you right
now. If I choose to include your response on a supplemental page, I
will include your original note in full, without altering it.

Introduction

The
intent behind this page is to provide a comprehensive response to the
arguments presented by Jehovah's Witnesses (referred to as JWs) against
the Trinity. I'm only just starting, so there's little here yet. I ask
your patience while I prepare the defense.
I'll
be creating several pages for this as time goes on. We will have
verse-by-verse and topic-by-topic answers and eventually a positive
presentation of the Trinity. However, my recommendation for you is not
to wait until I'm done here. There is a tremendous amount of literature
on various aspects of the Trinity. The best book I've found on the
doctrine as a whole is The Trinity--Evidence and Issues by Dr. Robert Morey. This book is a serious, and I do mean serious,
examination of the Trinity. It is a challenging work that you will use
and benefit from for years to come. Dr. Morey provides a sound and
thorough presentation of the Trinity. He also devotes a sizable section
of the book examining the arguments of those who deny the Trinity. His
analysis of their arguments is devastating.

Defining the Trinity

Let's begin with some brief definitions of the Trinity.

Trinity. The term designating one God in three
persons. Although not itself a biblical term, "the Trinity" has been
found a convenient designation for the one God self-revealed in
Scripture as the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. It signifies that within
the one essence of the Godhead we have to distinguish three "persons"
who are neither three gods on the one side, nor three parts or modes of
God on the other, but coequally and coeternally God. (Evangelical Dictionary of Theology, Walter Elwell--Editor, p.1112)

We may define the doctrine of the Trinity as follows: God eternally exists as three persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and each person is fully God, and there is one God. (Systematic Theology, Wayne Grudem, p.226)

Please
note that these are brief definitions. They are not full statements or
defenses in themselves. Many aspects of these definitions need to be
expanded upon (and will be, Lord willing). At the very least, they
provide you with a point of reference indicating where I'm coming from.
Jumping right into the defense of the Trinity without providing some
definition seemed to me to be rash.

Why Respond to Jehovah's Witnesses?

Why
bother with the JWs? Why should we spend a significant amount of time
and effort to defend the Trinity against attacks from the Watchtower?
In his book on the Trinity, Millard Erickson gives this analysis:

The other major source (of doctrinal challenges to the
Trinity) is the Christian sects, especially Jehovah's Witnesses, who
vehemently reject the biblical doctrine of the Trinity. Frequently,
Jehovah's Witnesses especially target relatively new converts of
orthodox Christianity as their prospects, initially stressing those
points of agreement that the two groups hold. When combined with the
zealous approach generally characterizing the outreach efforts of this
group, the movement constitutes a genuine challenge and threat to
orthodoxy. (God in Three Persons, Millard Erickson, p.24)

I
agree with Erickson. The Watchtower does present a "genuine challenge"
and should be taken seriously. That is precisely what I will endeavor
to do here, take them seriously and answer them honestly and
appropriately.

Respond to What?

When
we consider the vast array of publications produced by the Watchtower,
which one should we examine first? It makes sense to devote my time
initially to their most focused collection of challenges to the Trinity,
namely the 1989 Watchtower publication, Should You Believe in the Trinity?--Is Jesus Christ the Almighty God?
(referred to as SYBT.) SYBT has proven to be very popular with the
Jehovah's Witnesses. Therefore, responding to SYBT will identify the
main arguments currently in use by JWs in general.
Click here to go to this booklet on the Watchtower's site.
I will also be addressing some of the websites maintained by active
Jehovah's Witnesses. While these "independent" sites cannot be taken as
representing the official Watchtower position, the webmasters for these
sites are very active and visible in presenting their understanding of
Watchtower dogma and attacking Christian doctrine. The subtlety of
their presentations require close, careful examination.
That
the Watchtower misunderstands and misrepresents the Trinity is evident
quite early in SYBT. On page 2, the third question SYBT asks indicates a
fundamental error in the way it will challenge the Trinity. It says,
"Is Jesus Christ the Almighty God and part of the Trinity?"
(emphasis added) If you recall the definition of the Trinity I provided
above, the Trinity is NOT composed of "parts". The theological term Trinity
"signifies that within the one essence of the Godhead we have to
distinguish three "persons" who are neither three gods on the one side, nor three parts or modes of God on the other, but coequally and coeternally God. (Evangelical Dictionary of Theology,
Walter Elwell--Editor, p.1112) SYBT repeats this question several
times. We will deal with this error and others like it in our detailed
refutation by topic.

The Word "Trinity"--Why Use It?

The word
"Trinity" is not found anywhere in the Bible. Is this fact, in itself,
enough to end the discussion right here? Of course not. Both Christians and Jehovah's Witnesses use words all the time which are not found anywhere in the Bible. "JWs, is the word 'theocracy' found anywhere in the Bible?" No, but you still use the word "theocracy", don't you? Why? It is what could be called theological shorthand.
Theocracy is a term loaded with meaning and significance for Jehovah's
Witnesses. Using theological shorthand like this is a common, everyday
occurrence that should not shock or confuse a Christian or JW. It lets
you speak meaningfully to those around you without going through the
labor of giving the full definition of "theocracy" every time you
mention it. So it is with our use of the word "Trinity". While the
word itself is not found in the Scriptures, it encompasses and
incorporates a huge amount of Biblical data. So let's not get thrown
off the tracks of the discussion by the simple fact that the word
"Trinity" is theological shorthand used by Christians to communicate
their understanding concisely. Both Christians and JWs use non-biblical
words to describe biblical ideas. So let's move on and consider how
the depth of the doctrine of the Trinity will impact the way we approach
the topic.

Streams, Rivers, and the Great Ocean of the Trinity

This fact that the word Trinity is theological shorthand highlights a weakness in "verse by verse" discussion with JWs. Any single verse will not contain in itself
all of the data needed to define or defend the full theological
doctrine of the Trinity. But this does not overturn the Trinity. Nor
does it make the Trinity fall under the label "unbiblical". To
illustrate the biblical nature of the Trinity, let's use a word picture
of streams, rivers, and the ocean. Individual verses pertaining to the
Trinity are like small streams. These specific verses flow together
into larger concepts, which can be pictured as rivers fed by the streams
of verses. These conceptual rivers then flow into the great ocean of
the Trinity. Is the ocean found in a stream? in a river? No, all of the
streams and rivers flow together into the ocean. Now, this is
an illustration and no illustration is perfect. But I still think it is
a helpful way to relate individual verses to the very broad doctrine of
the Trinity.

Where to Start: the Beach or the Mountains?

Continuing
to soak in this watery illustration, you might wonder where we should
begin our investigation. Do we start in the mountains, entirely
ignorant of the ocean, and by tracing our way from a particular stream,
to a river, we finally arrive at the ocean? Or should we start with
prime beachfront property? Gazing out upon the ocean, we could ask
ourselves, "What must be true in order for this beautiful ocean to exist
in the way that it exists?" The first method--starting from the
mountaintop--would be approaching the Trinity using the "inductive"
method, meaning that from observing particular specific details, a
general conclusion is drawn. The second approach--starting at the ocean
and working your way back--is known as the "deductive" method.
Approaching the Trinity deductively means that you ask the question,
"What must be true in order for the Trinity to be what the Trinity is?"

Huh?? What's This Inductive-Deductive Stuff About?

Don't
dismiss this discussion simply on the basis of terms which might be
unfamiliar to you. While the terms themselves might be unfamiliar, I guarantee that you use both induction and deduction every single day.
How can I be sure? Let me explain. Induction is the process of
observing particular details and noting that the outcome is consistent.
Based on this repeatability, induction concludes that to repeat those
details again will, in all likelihood, give the same result. This
sounds a lot like scientific experiments, doesn't it? That's not by
chance. The inductive method of reasoning is also known as the
"scientific method". To use an illustration you will be familiar with,
let's think about playing catch with a ball. Why do you only bring one
ball to the game? Every time you play catch, you are using
inductive reasoning. How? Based on your previous experiences playing
catch, you expect the ball to come back to earth after you throw it. In
all probability it will come back to earth. You're expectation that the ball will return to earth is built on inductive reasoning.
You
use deductive reasoning every day, too. For example, you walk into
your living room, see the TV set on and no one in the room. You ask,
"Who left the room without turning off the TV?" You observed the
conclusion (TV on in empty room) and built the premises which
necessarily result in the conclusion you just observed. So you see,
this discussion of induction and deduction is not philosophical
mumbo-jumbo or speculation. These are things you use every day.
Additional helpful instruction can be found in Chapter 1 of Morey's book
on the Trinity.

My Approach Primarily Deductive

I
will be attempting to frame my defense of the Trinity primarily from a
deductive viewpoint. The Triune God is the "given" from which I work.
Throughout this analysis I will be asking, "What must be, in order for
what is to be what it is?"

Watchtower's View of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

Since
we provided a definition for the Trinity, it would be appropriate to
get the Watchtower's definition. On page 3 of SYBT under the heading Should You Believe It?,
the Watchtower gives a brief summary of their view on the Trinity.
Acknowledging that it is a brief statement, it is quite helpful because
it quickly highlights what the Watchtower holds as essential in their
view of God. It reads as follows:

Others, however, say that the Trinity doctrine is false,
that Almighty God stands alone as a separate, eternal, and all-powerful
being. They say that Jesus in his prehuman existence was, like the
angels, a separate spirit person created by God, and for this reason he
must have had a beginning. They teach that Jesus has never been
Almighty God's equal in any sense; he has always been subject to God and
still is. They also believe that the holy ghost is not a person but
God's spirit, his active force. (SYBT, page 3)

Truth, the Glory of God, and Scripture

We
will respond to the preceding Watchtower statement in detail in the
topic-by-topic section, which is still under construction. But even if
our response is not done yet, it is my goal to fairly and accurately
present the Watchtower's position. To not do so would be irresponsible
or dishonest. I serve the God of truth, therefore to honor Him I must
strive to be truthful in all things, including honestly presenting the
views I disagree with.
My motive in putting this analysis together is not
to win an argument. My motive is to honor God. It is my sincere
desire to display and defend the truth to the best of my ability, not
leaning on my own strength or the wisdom of men, but resting in the
grace of my Lord and my God who has called me to this good work. (Eph
2:4-10) It is my hope that God would use this study to glorify Himself
in all His Triune glory.
The foundation of this analysis is God's inspired, inerrant, and infallible word.

All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for
teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness;
that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work. (2
Timothy 3:16,17; NASB)

Dr. Pyuwarmer flipped the chart closed, took off his
reading glasses, and let out a long sigh. “John, there is
a procedure that can save your life. I’d like you to
consider it.

John Skeptich rubbed his temples and looked up. “Well, is
it an invasive procedure?”

“Well, that’s hard to
answer, John. Yes and no.”

“You call that an
answer, doc?” John’s frustration was beginning to show.
“Either it is or it isn’t.”

“Well, it’s kind of
both. I’m sorry, but it’s hard to describe. It’s a very
advanced procedure, and I don’t really understand it fully
myself. However, I think you should have it done.”

“Do you have any
literature that can explain it?”

“Well, yes, but it’s
not very clearly spelled out. You kind of have to read
between the lines. It’s all in there though.”

John could no longer
hide his frustration. He stood up, grabbed his coat, and
fixed Dr. Pyuwarmer with a hard look. “Look doctor.
You’re asking me to submit to a procedure you don’t
understand and can’t explain. With all due respect, I’ll
take my chances!” With that, John swept out the door,
slamming it so hard that Dr. Pyuwarmer’s medical school
diploma fell from the wall.

Putting yourself in John’s shoes, it’s easy to see how
hard it would be to put your faith in something that your
doctor didn’t even understand. Just as in this analogy,
Christians must be prepared to explain our faith with
nonbelievers. There are few things more important for
Christians to understand than the nature of God. Many of
the differences between biblical Christianity and cults
occur within the context of variant understandings of the
nature of God. If we are to worship God in truth (John
4:24) and share the truth with others, it is vitally
important that we have an understanding of what the Bible
says about God.

Perhaps the single most misunderstood doctrine regarding
the nature of God is the doctrine of the Trinity.
Believers and nonbelievers alike have a difficult time
comprehending God’s triune nature, and those that do
understand have a difficult time explaining it. As
critics of the Trinity are quick to point out, the word
“Trinity” is not found in the Bible, and no single verse
provides a summary of the Trinitarian doctrine. In an
email we received, LDS apologist D.L. Barksdale said, “The
homoousion Trinitarian dogma is heretical to anyone who
cherishes the Bible. It is an unbiblical doctrine…”

Complicating the issue are various misconceptions about
the Trinity within Christianity as well as from without.
Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons disregard the Trinity,
believing that Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are three
distinct gods, with the Father being a greater God than
the other two. Jehovah’s Witnesses especially emphasize
the subordination of the Godhead, believing Jesus
to be Michael the Archangel – a created being, and a
lesser “god” than Jehovah. Mormon doctrine is
polytheistic (worship of multiple gods), though some
Mormons will stress that their belief is henotheistic
(belief in multiple gods, but worship of only one).
Mohammad’s misunderstanding of the Trinity was apparently
affected by the hyperdulia veneration of Mary seen in the
Eastern and Roman Catholic churches, as the Qur’an accuses
Christians of believing the Trinity to be composed of God
the Father, Jesus, and Mary. Indeed, the doctrine of the
Trinity can pose a stumbling block for some people. A
Jehovah’s Witness sent us an email that included the
following (the English is poor, but you’ll see the
point): “And when I can not find in any Bible that I
read that there is a 3 headed god that will resurrect
anyone on this earth, both now or ever. If this 3 headed
god is your belief? I have never read about such a god in
any Christian Bible that I have ever read!” As I told
this man, we agree that the Bible does not teach of a
three-headed god. That sounds more akin to the hydra of
Greek mythology. Yet this illustrates the extent of the
misunderstandings. Even Christian churches have been
victimized by erroneous doctrines such as modalism,
particularly Oneness theology.

We may never fully understand the nature of God until we
get into heaven. God is omnipotent, omniscient,
omnipresent, and eternal. Our finite created minds are
unable to fully grasp these characteristics of God.
However, it is possible to have a basic understanding of
the triune nature of God, and to be able to defend this
doctrine with the Word of God. In this article, we’ll
assess the Scriptural evidence and put the pieces together
until they form a full picture. A triune God will be the
only possible verdict based on an objective analysis of
the Scriptural evidence.

The doctrine of the Trinity can be summed up as follows:
Within the one Being that is God, there exist eternally
three coequal and coeternal Persons, namely, the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit.[1]
In order to prove this doctrine we must prove the
following:

There is only
one God

The Father is
God

Jesus is God

The Holy
Spirit is God

The Father,
Son, and Holy Spirit are three distinct Persons.

Each point above is very important, and we will clearly
illustrate each. Heresy arises when these distinctions
are blurred. For instance, modalism (also known as
Oneness theology) would agree with items one through four,
but item five is where modalism fails. However, as James
White said in regards to the doctrine of the Trinity, “For
some reason many feel that there is a hierarchy of ‘error’
when it comes to the Trinity…. We are to worship God in
spirit and in truth, and two-thirds of the truth is not a
valid substitute, no matter which one-third of His truth
we choose to reject.”[2]

There is a treasure trove of Scriptures to support each of
the points we’ll be studying. To keep this article at a
reasonable length, where there are several relevant
verses, I’ll limit the full verse quotation to two verses
(in NIV, unless stated otherwise), and give the Scripture
references for the rest.

1. There is only one God:

Islam, Judaism, and Christianity are known as the big
three monotheistic religions. You won’t find many
arguments among Muslims, Jews, and Christians that there
is more than one God, except perhaps among some aberrant
sects. Nevertheless, let us establish this Scripturally
before we move on to areas where disagreements will arise.

A. There is only one God:

“You were
shown these things so that you might know that the LORD
is God; besides him there is no other.” – Deuteronomy
4:35

"This is what
the LORD says- Israel's King and Redeemer, the LORD
Almighty:
I am the first and I am the last; apart from me there is
no God.” – Isaiah 44:6

“But the LORD
is the true God; he is the living God, the eternal
King. When he is angry, the earth trembles; the nations
cannot endure his wrath.” – Jeremiah 10:10

“We know also
that the Son of God has come and has given us
understanding, so that we may know him who is true. And
we are in him who is true--even in his Son Jesus Christ.
He is the true God and eternal life.” – 1 John 5:20.

Other verses:
2 Chron. 15:3; John 17:3; 1 Thess. 1:9.

C. All other so-called “gods” are false gods.

“For all the
gods of the nations are idols, but the LORD made the
heavens.” – Psalm 96:5

“So then,
about eating food sacrificed to idols: We know that an
idol is nothing at all in the world and that there is no
God but one.” – 1 Corinthians 8:4

The verses above are clear evidence that there is only one
God. This is known as monotheism. Judaism, Islam,
and Christianity are known as the three great monotheistic
religions. However, Islam and Judaism will fall off as we
continue our support of the Trinity.

2. There is a plurality to God.

The Hebrew word for God is el in its singular
form. The most common form used for God is elohim,
which is plural in form. How can there be plural form
used for only one God? Some suggest that the answer is
found in the three persons of the Trinity. Others contend
that the plural construct denotes a fullness of deity as
opposed to plurality. I submit that both interpretations
are correct. I’m getting ahead of myself now though.
Rather than look at all the verses that use the plural
elohim, let’s look at other verses that point to a
plurality within the one God.

“Let us
make man in our image” – Genesis 1:26, emphasis
added.

“God said,
‘Behold, the man has become like one of us…’” –
Genesis 3:22, emphasis added.

Some would say that God could be speaking to the angels in
these verses, but that's simply not correct. God was
speaking to co-creator(s) in these verses (“Let us make
man…”). Who could be a co-creator? Not the angels. The
answer is found later in this article.

3. The Father is God.

This isn’t really an item that is in question. While God
the Father is only known as the Father in the New
Testament, Christians, Jews, Muslims, and pseudo-Christian
cults understand that the Father in the New Testament is
the Yahweh of the Old Testament, though some disagree with
the characterization of “Father”. However, it is
important to establish that the Father of the New
Testament is the true God referred to in the Old
Testament, known often as Yahweh, or “Jehovah”.[3]

A. The Father is God.

“Praise be to
the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father
of compassion and the God of all comfort,” – 2
Corinthians 1:3

“Praise be to
the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who has
blessed us in the heavenly realms with every spiritual
blessing in Christ.” – Ephesians 1:3

Other
verses: John 17:3; 1 Cor. 8:6; 1 Peter 1:3; (Note: Some
verses seem to indicate that Jesus is not God at first
glance. These will be explained later).

B. The God of the Old Testament is known as
Yahweh/Jehovah (“The LORD”).

“You were
shown these things so that you might know that the LORD
is God; besides him there is no other…. Acknowledge and
take to heart this day that the LORD is God in heaven
above and on the earth below. There is no other.” –
Deuteronomy 4:35, 39.[4]

“Know that
the LORD is God. It is he who made us, and we are his;
we are his people, the sheep of his pasture.” – Psalm
100:3

Other
verses: Gen. 9:26; 24; Exo. 3:14-18; 4:5; 2 Sam. 7:22,
25.

From the verses above, it is clear that Yahweh/Jehovah in
the Old Testament is the one God. It is also clear that
the Father in the New Testament is that one God. Now,
let’s look at whether Jesus Christ is God. Remember,
there is only one God. There is also a mysterious
plurality to this one God. We have established that the
Father is Yahweh, the God of the Old Testament. We now
explore the plurality in the one true God.

4. Jesus is God.

There is a great deal of Scriptural evidence that Jesus
Christ is God. The evidence is comprised not only of
specific statements, but also in prophecy fulfillment and
his attributes. Let’s first look at some of explicit
Scriptural evidence. In this section, we won’t limit
ourselves to only giving the text of two verses.

“In the
beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and
the Word was God…. No one has ever seen God, but God the
One and Only, who is at the Father's side, has made him
known.” – John 1:1

“Thomas said
to him, ‘My Lord and my God!’” – John 20:28

I want to pause just a moment to discuss the verses
above. The Greek word for God is theos. In John
1:1, we read that the Word (Jesus) was with theos
and was indeed theos. Jesus was (and is) God!
This is a very powerful statement! The word theos
is used not only in John 1:1, but also in verse 18 and in
John 20:28. Theos is used in the New Testament in
reference to Jehovah/Yahweh God. Theos is also
used in reference to Jesus. We’re beginning to see the
plurality found within the one God.

"You are
worthy, our Lord and God, to receive glory and honor and
power, for you created all things, and by your will they
were created and have their being." – Revelation 4:11
(the words of the 24 elders to Jesus).

“…Be
shepherds of the church of God, which he bought with his
own blood.” – Acts 20:28

Once again, in the verses above Jesus is referred to as
theos. In Acts 20:28, we know that Jesus shed His
blood for the church, and as one person of the triune God,
this action is the action of God. Now let’s look at some
common compound references to Jesus:

“…To those
who through the righteousness of our God and Savior
Jesus Christ have received a faith as precious as ours”
– 2 Peter 1:1

In the passages above, both “God” and “Savior” are used in
reference to Jesus Christ. There is no division of the
clause. Scholar Robert Reymond writes, “The two nouns
[‘God’ and ‘Savior’] both stand under the regimen of the
single definitive article preceding ‘God,’ indicating…that
they are to be construed corporately, not separately, or
that they have a single referent.”[5]
In other words, attempts to divide this clause into a
reference to God and a separate reference to Jesus as
Savior flies against the Greek grammatical construct.
These verses provide additional powerful and clear
evidence that Jesus is Jehovah/Yahweh God. Let’s now turn
our attention to more verses that reveal Jesus to be
Jehovah/Yahweh.

“That if you
confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in
your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will
be saved…. for, ‘Everyone who calls on the name of the
Lord will be saved.’” – Romans 10:9,13. Note: Paul
reveals Jesus to be the same “Lord” referred to in Joel
2:32, which he quotes. In Joel 2:32, “LORD” is
Jehovah/Yahweh.

“…that at the
name of Jesus every knee should bow, in heaven and on
earth and under the earth, and every tongue confess that
Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.” –
Philippians 2:10-11. Note: “Lord” = Jehovah/Yahweh.

“…now that
you have tasted that the Lord is good.” – 1 Peter 2:3.
This verse is taken almost identically from Psalms 34:8,
where “Lord” is Jehovah/Yahweh. From the verses that
follow verse 3, it is clear this is a reference to
Jesus.

Another way we know that Jesus is Jehovah/Yahweh comes
from the fulfillment of an Old Testament prophecy.
Zechariah 12:10 says, “And I will pour out on the house of
David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem a spirit of grace
and supplication. They will look on me, the one they have
pierced, and they will mourn for him as one mourns for an
only child, and grieve bitterly for him as one grieves for
a firstborn son.” This verse is part of an oracle given
by Jehovah/Yahweh. This passage starts off in verse 1,
“This is the word of the LORD concerning Israel. The LORD,
who stretches out the heavens, who lays the foundation of
the earth, and who forms the spirit of man within him,
declares…” Jehovah/Yahweh prophesies that He will be
pierced. It is widely accepted among scholarly circles
that this was fulfilled in the crucifixion and spearing of
Jesus Christ. This is confirmed in Revelation 1:7 wherein
we read concerning Jesus, “Look, he is coming with the
clouds, and every eye will see him, even those who pierced
him; and all the peoples of the earth will mourn because
of him. So shall it be! Amen.” This is important enough
to go over again. In Zechariah 12:10, Jehovah/Yahweh
prophesies that He (Jehovah/Yahweh) will be pierced, and
people will mourn for Him. Jesus Christ is pierced
through his hands and feet at his crucifixion, and pierced
through the side with a spear while on the cross.
Revelation 1:7 confirms this fulfillment of prophecy.
Conclusion? Jesus Christ is Jehovah/Yahweh!

Another evidence that Jesus is Jehovah/Yahweh comes from
His role as Savior. Isaiah 43:11 says, “I, even I, am the
LORD, and apart from me there is no savior.” Yet Jesus is
referred to many times in the New Testament as our Savior
(Luke 2:11; John 4:42; Acts 13:23; Eph. 5:23; Phi. 3:20; 1
Tim. 1:1; 2 Tim. 1:10; Tit 1:4; 2:13; 3:6; 2 Pet. 1:1,11;
2:20; 3:2,18; 1 John 4:14).

Jesus caused no small uproar among the Jews of the day
because He accepted praise and worship – blasphemous if He
were not God! As we have seen, only God is the savior of
men. Matthew 21:1-11 describes Jesus’ triumphal entry
into Jerusalem. He came riding in on a donkey, in
fulfillment of an Old Testament messianic prophecy (Zec.
9:9). As Jesus rode in, we find the crowds that surrounded
him shouting “Hosanna to the Son of David!” “Blessed
is he who comes in the name of
the Lord!” “Hosanna
in the highest!” Webster’s 1913 dictionary defined
Hosanna as “A Hebrew exclamation of praise to the Lord.”
The word is derived from a Hebrew word that meant “Save
us,” in a prayer directed to God. This shows that the
crowd viewed Jesus as God and Savior. It is important to
note that Jesus did not rebuke the crowd for this praise.
In verse 15, we find that the chief priests and Pharisees
were outraged and indignant at this (because, as we said,
this would be blasphemy for a mere man). Children had
followed Jesus in to the temple are and were still
shouting, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” In verse
16, they asked Jesus if He could hear what the children
were saying. No doubt they were shocked that he would not
have straightened out the blasphemy of these little
urchins. But Jesus did not rebuke the children. Instead,
He answered, “Yes. Have you never read, ‘From the lips
of children and infants you have ordained praise’?”
Additionally, in John 9:35-39 we read the following
exchange:

35Jesus
heard that they had thrown him out, and when he found him,
he said, "Do you believe
in the Son of Man?" 36"Who is he, sir?" the man asked. "Tell me so
that I may believe in him." 37Jesus said, "You
have now seen him; in fact, he is the one speaking with
you." 38Then the man said, "Lord, I believe," and he worshiped him. [emphasis added]39Jesus said, "For
judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind
will see and those who see will become blind."

Jesus accepted worship. This is
not adoration of a mere prophet, but praise and worship
due only to God. Jesus was either God or He was crazy,
and there is ample evidence against the latter and in
support of the former. Further evidence comes from the
fact that Jesus has many of the attributes of God:

It is clear from the Scriptural
evidence above that Jesus is God. He is the LORD
(Jehovah/Yahweh) of the Old Testament, and therefore is
the one true elohim or theos. He shares
this role as God with the Father. As we are about to see,
He also shares this role with the Holy Spirit.

5. The Holy Spirit is God

Less Scripture is dedicated to
the Holy Spirit, but there is enough to conclude that He
too is God. In Acts 5:3-4, we see the Holy Spirit being
equated with God:

“Then Peter
said, ‘Ananias, how is it that Satan has so filled your
heart that you have lied to the Holy Spirit and
have kept for yourself some of the money you received
for the land? Didn't it belong to you before it was
sold? And after it was sold, wasn't the money at your
disposal? What made you think of doing such a thing?
You have not lied to men but to God.’” [emphasis
added]

Paul clearly and explicitly
equated the Holy Spirit with God:

“Now the Lord
is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is,
there is freedom. And we, who with unveiled faces all
reflect the Lord's glory, are being transformed into his
likeness with ever-increasing glory, which comes from
the Lord, who is the Spirit.” – 2 Corinthians 3:17-18

Additional evidence of the deity
of the Holy Spirit comes from the shared attributes of the
deity. The Holy Spirit is:

Eternal (Heb.
9:14)

Omniscient (1
Cor. 2:10-11)

Omnipresent (Psa.
139:7)

Savior (Rom.
8:1-27)

In addition to the attributes
above, we find the Holy Spirit was involved in creation
(Gen. 1:2; Psa. 104:30), the incarnation (Matt. 1:18,20;
Luke 1:35), and the resurrection (Rom. 1:4; 8:11). This
is ample evidence to show that the Holy Spirit is God. We
have now proven Scripturally that there is only one God.
We have also proven that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit
can each lay claim to being God. However, one can believe
in all this, and still subscribe to the erroneous belief
of modalism.

Modalists believe that there is
only one God, but believe God to be comprised of one
Person who simply manifests Himself at different times
through Father, Son, or Holy Spirit. In other words,
modalists believe that God is one in substance as well as
essence – the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are not
distinct persons. As we shall see, modalism fails because
the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are indeed three distinct
persons.

6. The Father, Son, and Holy
Spirit are three distinct persons.

A. Jesus is not the Father:
First, let’s turn our attention to Matthew 28:19, “Therefore
go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in
the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy
Spirit”. The grammatical construction of this verse
is very revealing with regards to Trinitarian doctrine.
First, each person of the Trinity is identified
individually with use of the definite article preceding
each (the Father…the Son…the
Holy Spirit). The use of the definite article for each
person of the Trinity identifies each as unique and
distinct from the others. Yet at the same time, this
verse groups each into a singular entity by use of the
singular form “the name of”. What is this name? The
singular name of God is Yahweh/Jehovah, and the
Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit share
that name. Other verses identify the Father and the Son
as two separate persons (John 3:17, 35; 5:22-23, 31-32;
8:16-18; 11:41-42; 12:28; 14:31; 17:1-26; Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor.
1:3; 15:24-28; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; 4:4; Eph. 1:2; 6:23;
Phil. 1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:1-2; 1 Tim. 1:1-2; 2
Tim. 1:2; Tit. 1:4; Phm. 3; James 1:1; 2 Pet. 1:2; 1 John
4:10; 2 John 3).

B. Jesus is not the Holy
Spirit: The first evidence of this is discussed in
detail in the preceding paragraph – Matthew 28:19
identifies the Son and the Holy Spirit as separate
persons, using definite articles preceding each. Next,
Jesus tells us that He would send the Holy Spirit (“When
the Counselor comes, whom I will send to you from the
Father, the Spirit of truth who goes out from the Father,
he will testify about me.” – John 15:26). This verse
is revealing in that each person of the Trinity is
mentioned as separate individual persons. Key elements in
this verse include 1) Jesus will send the Holy Spirit, 2)
from the Father, 3) the Holy Spirit will go out from
the Father, 4) and will testify about Jesus. Another
verse that identifies Jesus and the Holy Spirit separately
is John 16:7, “But I tell you the truth: It is for your
good that I am going away. Unless I go away, the Counselor
will not come to you; but if I go, I will send him to you.”
Here we have two important elements: 1) Jesus will go
away, and 2) send the Holy Spirit. Since Jesus arose and
ascended in his physical human body, the Spirit He sends
is not Jesus Himself. Another important verse is John
14:16, “And I will ask the Father, and he will give you
another Counselor to be with you forever” (emphasis
added). Once again, the elements are here to show that
Jesus, the Father, and the Holy Spirit are separate.
Jesus said He would ask the Father. If Jesus were simply
a manifestation of the Father, then He would be asking
Himself, which sounds neurotic rather than orthodox. The
verse also refers to the Holy Spirit as “another
Counselor” separate from Jesus.

C. The Father is not the
Holy Spirit: Once again, the first bit of evidence is
given in Matthew 28:19 as discussed before. John 14:16,
and 15:26 also remain as evidence that the Father and Holy
Spirit are distinct persons. As we delved into each verse
in the preceding paragraph, we won’t do so again. We also
find Paul describing in Romans 8:26-27 that the Holy
Spirit intercedes for us with the Father. If the Holy
Spirit were the same person as the Father, he would not
need to intercede with himself.

Now let’s address another
Scripture that makes it clear that the Father, the Son,
and the Holy Spirit are three different persons. Luke
3:21-22 covers the baptism of Jesus Christ, “When all the
people were being baptized, Jesus was baptized too. And as
he was praying, heaven was opened and the Holy Spirit
descended on him in bodily form like a dove. And a voice
came from heaven: ‘You are my Son, whom I love; with you I
am well pleased.’” Each person is described separately
here. First, note that Jesus was praying. If Oneness
theology were correct, Jesus would be praying to Himself.
Once again, that smacks of neurosis. Instead, Jesus was
praying to the Father. As He did, the Holy Spirit
descended on Jesus in a physical manifestation like a
dove. The voice of the Father was then heard from Heaven,
speaking to the Son. This highlights that each person of
the Trinity is unique and separate.

7. Conclusion:

It is clear from a reading of
the Bible that there is only one God, known in the Old
Testament as Yahweh/Jehovah. It is clear that the Father,
the Son, and the Holy Spirit are each God (Yahweh). It is
also clear, in contrast to Oneness theology (Unitarian
modalism), that each person is separate and distinct from
the other. One God in three persons – the Biblical
Trinity.

Ontology
is important in understanding the Trinity. Ontology is
the study of “being.” As James White said, “It is vitally
important that we recognize the difference between the
words Being and Person…. Being is
what makes something what it is. Person is
what makes someone who he or she is…. when speaking
of the Trinity, we speak of one what (the Being of
God) and three whos (the three divine Persons).
Most cultic rejections of the Trinity focus on blurring
the distinction.”[6]

Are you still having a difficult
time comprehending the triune nature of God? That’s
understandable. The laws to which we are bound define our
comprehension. God’s nature transcends these laws. If we
could fully comprehend God’s nature, he would cease to be
Almighty God. He would be lesser than He truly is. I am
a devotee of analogies. One analogy I like to use with
regards to the Trinity is my computer. My computer
consists of input devices (mouse and keyboard), output
devices (monitor, printer, speakers), and the central
processing unit. These different components form my one
computer. This analogy fails to capture the full
complexity of the substance of God, but it can help
someone to grasp the basic relationship.

It is true, as so many Mormons,
Muslims, and Jehovah’s Witness are inclined to point out,
that there is no concise, clear teaching of the Trinity in
the New Testament or Old Testament. However, by such
reasoning, there is also no clear teaching regarding
smoking or illicit drug use. Yet by examining Scripture
in its greater context, it is clear that our body is the
temple of God (1 Cor. 6:19) and Paul urges us to purify
ourselves from things which contaminate the body (2 Cor.
7:1). Similarly, by examining the sum of Scripture in
immediate and greater context, it is clear that God is
triune. He is one God, eternally existent in three divine
persons – the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. We
must be able to defend this biblical doctrine if we are to
effectively contend for the truth of the gospel.

[Author’s note: In the
coming weeks, we will post a follow-up article to examine
and refute the most common objections raised against the
Trinity by various cults, such as the Jehovah’s Witnesses
and the Mormon Church.]

3. The
Hebrew name for God is YHWH – four consonants
only. Because of a nearly superstitious fear of taking
the Lord’s name in vain, the Jews avoided using this name,
and often used the name Adonai. Eventually, the
vowels from Adonai were included in YHWH to form
Yahowah. Today, this name is often spelled in
English, Yahweh. As a human contrivance, Yahowah
mutated to Jehovah in some manuscripts. Yahweh and
Jehovah are considered synonymous, and mean “The LORD.”
The Hebrew word for “God” is el or elohim.

4. In these
verses, and the ones that follow, “LORD” is
Yahweh/Jehovah, and “God” is elohim. It is
important to note that el is singular, but
elohim is plural. Since the Bible is clear that there
is only one el, the plurality of elohim can
present a conundrum. This problem is resolved by the
doctrine of the Trinity – three divine Persons in one
God. One should also note that the New World Translation
(The Bible of the Jehovah’s Witnesses) and the ASV leave
out “LORD” and simply include “Jehovah”.